- "The milk, or latex, that emanates when the mushroom tissue is cut or broken" Is "emanates" a term used by mycologists? If not, I suggest replacing it, as it often gives a connotation of spiritual energy or isotropy.
- Hadn't noticed that before, but now that you mention it, it's an odd word choice. I've changed it to the more usual "exudes". Sasata (talk) 21:27, 23 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- I agree that "exudes" or "flows" or "oozes" would be better, Casliber (talk · contribs) 03:04, 25 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- "A widely distributed species, it is found in eastern North America, East Asia, and Central America" I instinctively want to put "native" somewhere in this sentence. Perhaps "A widely distributed species, it is found natively throughout eastern North America, East Asia, and Central America" or "A widely distributed species, it grows natively in eastern North America, East Asia, and Central America".
- Sure, that works. In my research I didn't notice any mention of it being an introduced species in any locations, so the statement is equally accurate (and slightly more informative) with the term "natively" added. Sasata (talk) 21:27, 23 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- I have never seen the adverb "natively" used in any plant, bird or mushroom guidebook over the years I have been exploring the countryside. I changed it to "naturally" before I came across this. If it is still important to get the word itself in, I'd say "A widely distributed species, it is native to eastern North America, East Asia, and Central America" Casliber (talk · contribs) 03:04, 25 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- I thought "native" was used to contrast with "introduced", but I'm fine with the wording as it is now (i.e., naturally). Sasata (talk) 00:51, 26 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- "It is an edible mushroom, and is sold in rural markets in Mexico, Guatemala, and China." This recipe website seems to indicate that the L. indigo and other members of Lactarius are eaten in the United States and Russia. This American-written book also mentions them. Although this may not be a big deal for the lead, I did notice that the Edibility section doesn't mention American consumption either.
- For the lead I just wanted to give a general blanket statement about its edibility, and mention the rural markets to allude to its commercial relevance in those countries. The book you mention I think I can get at the university library; I'll try to hunt it down this week and see if there's anything useful from it that I can add to the edibility section, and a page number so I can source American consumption. I'm reluctant to mention Russian usage from the MSSA site, as it mentions them eating milkcaps in general, but not specifically L. indigo (and I hadn't come across mention of Russian distribution of the species). Sasata (talk) 21:27, 23 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- I didn't think the Russian consumption was particularly important since I only saw it mentioned in that one source. I only mentioned it to illustrate the possibility that the consumption distribution may be more widespread than your sources indicated. --Cryptic C62 · Talk 17:18, 25 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- I've altered the initial sentence of the edibility section so as to more clearly insinuate that Americans eat it too. Sasata (talk) 00:51, 26 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- "Originally described in 1822 as Agaricus indigo by American mycologist Lewis David de Schweinitz, it was later transferred to the genus Lactarius in 1838 by the Swede Elias Magnus Fries." What does "it" refer to here? This will be particularly confusing to those who are not familiar with taxonomy.
- "It" is now "the species". Sasata (talk) 00:51, 26 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- "group characterized by blue latex and a viscid, blue cap" What does "viscid" mean?
- Swapped the jargon word "viscid" with the simpler "sticky". Sasata (talk) 00:51, 26 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- "They would later (1979) revise their opinions" This is a very odd construction. Suggestion: "In 1979, they revised their opinions"
- Done. Sasata (talk) 00:20, 27 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Perhaps this is a somewhat naive suggestion, but I would think that the Taxonomy section would be better named Nomenclature; the last paragraph doesn't seem to be specifically about taxonomy as I am familiar with the term. On the other hand, it would seem silly to have an article about a species that doesn't have a Taxonomy section. What do you think?
- Tricky - I've used Taxonomy or Taxonomy and naming in the many many bird, fungus and plant FAs so far, and would hate to break conformity....musing on it for bigger picture though... Taxonomy is the broadest all-encompassing term /i thought of. Casliber (talk · contribs) 22:19, 26 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- I agree the second paragraph isn't about taxonomy per se, so I've retitled the section "Taxonomy and nomenclature". Sasata (talk) 00:20, 27 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- "under appropriate environmental conditions," What are these environmental conditions?
- "Under appropriate environmental conditions of temperature, humidity, and nutrient availability," Sasata (talk) 00:20, 27 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- "becoming somewhat funnel-shaped as the margin lifts upward" What is a "margin" in this context?
- Changed to "edge of the cap". Sasata (talk) 00:20, 27 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- "sometimes with greenish stains" stains from what?
- Changed stains to splotches. Sasata (talk) 00:20, 27 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- "it is often zoned by concentric rings" Is "zoned" a mycological term? I have never heard it used like this.
- I have heard it used this way before, but I've reworded to "it is often marked with concentric color bands that give it a zoned appearance"... is that better? Sasata (talk) 00:20, 27 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Erm, I still don't know what it means. What exactly are you trying to convey with this "zoned"/"zoned appearance" thing? I've never heard "zoned" used like this before.
- How's this: "It is often zonate: marked with concentric lines that form alternating pale and darker zones," that way there's a link to the technical term, and a brief description without using the word zoned :) Sasata (talk) 17:21, 27 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- "The gills of the mushroom are adnate (squarely attached to the stem) to slightly decurrent (running down the length of the stem)" I think it would help to link "adnate" and "decurrent" if possible. Also, if this sentence is trying to set up a spectrum, I would suggest adding "range": "The gills of the mushroom range from adnate to slightly decurrent"
- Linking these terms would just lead back to the lamella (mycology) page, which is already linked. So I added wiktionary links for both, and included the word "range". Sasata (talk) 17:21, 27 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- "Fruit bodies have no distinguishable odor." A very broad statement that may be misinterpreted as pertaining to all fruiting bodies. Suggest specifying L. indigo.
- Done. Sasata (talk) 17:21, 27 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- "The stem is 2–6 centimetres (0.8–2.4 in) tall by 1–2.5 centimetres (0.4–1.0 in) thick, indigo blue to silvery- or grayish blue, the same diameter throughout or sometimes narrowed at base, rigid, and hollowed with age." Although this is all focused on the stem, I'm not a fan of lists of unrelated descriptors. I think the measurements and "the same diameter throughout" should be grouped together. Also, what does "hollowed with age" mean? What is inside when it is younger?
- Reorganized stem descriptors as suggested. Also, "The interior of the stem is solid and firm initially, but develops a hollow in age." Sasata (talk) 17:21, 27 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Much better, but I'm not sure about "but develops a hollow in age". I would think that "hollow" is used more frequently as an adjective than as a noun. Also, shouldn't it be "with age" rather than "in age"?
- I'd have to disagree with you on the usage of hollow; in fact if you do a Google search for "define hollow", the first definition that comes up is "a cavity or space in something". I did, however, change in age to with age. Sasata (talk) 03:46, 28 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Is there any chance a diagram could be made comparing the sizes of L. indigo versus L. indigo diminutivus?
- I'm not sure it would be that helpful... one has a cap diameter of 5-15 cm, the other 3-7 cm. Is there anything that might be conveyed by a diagam that couldn't be readily understood by comparing these two ranges? Sasata (talk) 03:46, 28 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- I find it a bit confusing that the latex picture with the caption "The "milk", or latex, is indigo blue." is found next to the Similar species. It makes me wonder "Which species is this?"
- I've moved the latex picture into the edibility section to reduce this possible confusion. Sasata (talk) 03:46, 28 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- "Specimens producing copious quantities of milk may be used in marinades with interesting results" I strongly suggest avoiding the use of "interesting", as it is both vague and subjective.
- Agree. Now "Specimens producing copious quantities of milk may be used to add color to marinades."
- "The blue color of Lactarius indigo is largely due to the compound (7-isopropenyl-4-methylazulen-1-yl)methyl stearate, an azulene, that has been extracted and purified from fruit bodies." This sentence implies that the the blue color is due to the extraction and purification of a compound, which I doubt is actually the case.
- Have reworded to remove the unnecessary extraction and purification part. Now "The blue color of Lactarius indigo is due to (7-isopropenyl-4-methylazulen-1-yl)methyl stearate, an organic compound known as an azulene."
- "Lactarius indigo is a mycorrhizal fungus, and as such, establishes a mutualistic relationship between the roots of certain trees ("hosts"), in which the fungi exchange minerals and amino acids extracted from the soil for fixed carbon from the host." Unless I'm misinterpreting this, shouldn't this read "a mutualistic relationship with the roots"?
- Good catch, fixed. Sasata (talk) 00:42, 29 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- "an intimate association that is especially beneficial to the plant" I find the use of "plant" here to be a tad confusing since "tree" is used everywhere else in this section.
- Yeah, I originally did that to avoid having the word "tree" thrice in one sentence, but I instead changed this instance to "host". Sasata (talk) 05:47, 29 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- "Smooth-bark Mexican Pine and other Pine and oak species in Guatemala" Shouldn't "pine" be decapitalized here? Same concern about the native distribution of these trees applies here as well. As this is written, it implies that the Smooth-bark Mexican Pine grows only in Guatemala.
- Decapped pine; have reorganized the sentence. Sasata (talk) 05:47, 29 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- "Associations have been noted with Mexican alder, American Hornbeam, American Hophornbeam, and Sweetgum (Liquidambar macrophylla) in Mexico" I don't understand why Sweetgum is the only species in this list for which the Latin name is given. Also, why does this say "in Mexico" when several of the trees are native to other countries?
- I did it that way because Sweetgum is the collective common name for the genus, but the source specifies one species of that genus; however, as far as I know, this species doesn't have a common name, and there is no wiki article about it. So I gave the genus common name because I thought that having the Latin binomial by itself mixed with the all of the other common names in the sentence would stick out. Am open to suggestions for improvement... Sasata (talk) 05:47, 29 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Hrm, I see. I don't think it would be that weird to have one Latin name mixed in with the common names. It may be odd, but I think it would be less confusing than the current construction. How about having the Latin name wikilinked to Sweetgum?
- Ok, that's reasonable... linked the binomial to Sweetgum. Sasata (talk) 04:32, 5 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- "In Costa Rica, the species forms associations..." I find it odd that this paragraph discusses native associations, then laboratory associations, then native associations again. I think it would make sense to have all of the native country association sentences grouped together.
- Sure, done. Sasata (talk) 04:32, 5 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- "with several native oaks, such as Quercus seemannii, Q. copeyensis, Q. oocarpa, Q. oleoides, Q. corrugata and Q. costaricensis" I think this should be replaced with just "with several native oaks of the Quercus genus". That would help trim down the overly large number of examples in this paragraph.
- Agreed - improves readability, cuts down redlinks, and those who want the details can click the link. Why didn't I think of that? Sasata (talk) 04:32, 5 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- "frequency of appearance has been described as "occasional to locally common"" Where? In Costa Rica? Or everywhere?
- Specified Appalachian Mountains. Sasata (talk) 04:32, 5 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- I don't really understand the point of the final paragraph. It seems to summarize information presented in the previous paragraph. Perhaps the order could be switched?
- Agreed. Have reorganized the section, and renamed the section header to reflect the new arrangement of info. Sasata (talk) 04:32, 5 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
|
